No, I don't think he'll lose focus. There are far to many other records to keep Federer busy. I suspect he may get the most satisfaction from breaking the record for most Wimbledon titles shared by Renshaw and Sampras (7), and also the record for most consecutive Wimbledon titles held by Renshaw alone (6). The number one ranking is also very important to Federer, so I see him making a real effort to surpass Sampras's 286 weeks at the top AND his six straight years at the top (a record shared by Tilden).

Federer has to decide if he would rather win 20 slams or 28 slams. In another thread I detailed the motvation behind either. If he wants to, he certainly is capable of 28 slams-7 Australian Opens, 3 French Opens, 10 Wimbledons, and 8 U.S Opens. However he might be satisfied with only 20 slams-5 Australian Opens, 1 French Open, 8 Wimbledons, 6 U.S Opens, depending upon how he views the incentives of either collection of titles.

Sampras "lost focus" before his 14th Slam. He retired immediately after his last Slam win.

Good point. Well, maybe that was not focus. Maybe that was just fitness or something. I still cannot believe he pulled that last one out against Agassi. Or the final at Wimbledon againt Pat Rafter, who kinda had him early in that match.

As a Pete fan, I look back and shake my head at the two Sunday US Open final losses after tough semis on Saturday. Safin and Hewitt. Man, that hurt a lot more than any other loss, including the one to Edberg in 92, was it?

ANyway, back to Rog.....yeah, I think it will not be a matter of focus. I think he will start losing to the next generation of quick big guys who can control the middle and get to net before Roger does. Kind of a Roger/Becker/Monfils/Safin hybrid.....I think that's the future.
Roger's woes in Slams will start happening with some regularity in the year 2009. Maybe 2010.

Well, what the hell do I know? But it is fun to sit here and pontificate.

i don't think slower courts ended sampras' reign at wimbledon. i've watched the federer-sampras match several times, and the court was fast. both players served and volleyed. sampras was just too old.

federer seems more dedicated to being the best. federer won 3 of 4 majors twice, but his backhand is clearly better than it was in 04, and he seems to be trying to be more agressive on returns. federer also works on improving on clay so he can beat nadal on clay.
i didn't see the same kind of thing from sampras.

I just got back from a really fun night out with the wife and several friends....and I'm kind of drunk, so take this with a grain of salt........but I'm feeling like Pete would rush the hell out of Roger and **** him off on a faster court. US Open final? Oh, yeah, I'd pay triple-retail for a ticket to that. I'd even wear a pair of Sergio Tacchini shorts with spandex underpants and a Greek warrior on the chest ... Samprass circa 1991!

I just got back from a really fun night out with the wife and several friends....and I'm kind of drunk, so take this with a grain of salt........but I'm feeling like Pete would rush the hell out of Roger and **** him off on a faster court. US Open final? Oh, yeah, I'd pay triple-retail for a ticket to that. I'd even wear a pair of Sergio Tacchini shorts with spandex underpants and a Greek warrior on the chest ... Samprass circa 1991!

I just got back from a really fun night out with the wife and several friends....and I'm kind of drunk, so take this with a grain of salt........but I'm feeling like Pete would rush the hell out of Roger and **** him off on a faster court. US Open final? Oh, yeah, I'd pay triple-retail for a ticket to that. I'd even wear a pair of Sergio Tacchini shorts with spandex underpants and a Greek warrior on the chest ... Samprass circa 1991!

When I'm drunk I start hitting on fat chicks, so I excuse you for your careless thoughts...

It isn't about age. Agassi shows true love and played until his body failed on him at age of 36. To compete and to be better, is what Agassi about. see, Sampras is about to win and to dominate. It isn't love to tennis. When he couldn't win and dominate, he left the game and isolated himself from tennis. He got bored of retirement and play tons and tons of golf then back to senior tour searching for some old day glory. Agree, if he kept winning and dominating, he would still play. This isn't show of love or lost of interest. He quitted simply can't win anymore.

Federer has to decide if he would rather win 20 slams or 28 slams. In another thread I detailed the motvation behind either. If he wants to, he certainly is capable of 28 slams-7 Australian Opens, 3 French Opens, 10 Wimbledons, and 8 U.S Opens. However he might be satisfied with only 20 slams-5 Australian Opens, 1 French Open, 8 Wimbledons, 6 U.S Opens, depending upon how he views the incentives of either collection of titles.

^^^ Sampras took the French very seriously. Just because he didn't win it, doesn't mean he didn't take it seriously.

I liked/like Pete and followed his career from almost the very beginning, but from what I can recall, he wasn't all that serious about RG. I had the impression that he just "figured" that he'd eventually win it, along with everything else that he was winning at the time. But after a few year of early round losses, he blew it off to focus on those majors that he was sure he could win (the other 3).

If he had taken RG so seriously, he would have played the entire clay court season in Europe instead of arriving in DeGaulle Airport a couple days before the event. He would have gotten himself a coach who has an expertise playing on the clay...he would have bought himself a clay court...he could have done a lot. Only in the last couple years of his career, when he started thinking about his final legacy in the game, did he start making public statements about how "serious" he was-though that talk didn't translate into much more effort, that I could see.

__________________
"Why don't you get off your *** and get me a COKE!"

--Tim Henman as barked to a ball boy on a changeover, during his annual Wimbledon meltdown, 2005.

Look, having a benchmark to follow doesn't hurt. Sampras and the rest have set the standard, it makes it easier for Federer to stay focus in his attempts to break these records.

In any case, I don't think slam count is the priority for Federer. It should be the coming French Open. This is THE BIG ONE. If he gets that, he will have achieved 4 consecutive Slams. This will be the beginning of all great things to come because ultimately, THE GRAND SLAM will be seriously within his reach. Federer can really cement his status as the GOAT if he gets the French.

If Federer is to lose focus after THAT, I'm not surprised! For those who still want to nitpick, he can still focus on breaking the year end no. 1 record, or even, the h2h against Nadal.